Predator Functional Response Changed by Induced Defenses in Prey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functional responses play a central role in the nature and stability of predator-prey population dynamics. Here we investigate how induced defenses affect predator functional responses. In experimental communities, prey (Paramecium) expressed two previously undocumented inducible defenses--a speed reduction and a width increase--in response to nonlethal exposure to predatory Stenostomum. Nonlethal exposure also changed the shape of the predator's functional response from Type II to Type III, consistent with changes in the density dependence of attack rates. Handling times were also affected by prey defenses, increasing at least sixfold. These changes show that induced changes in prey have a real defensive function. At low prey densities, induction led to lower attack success; at high prey densities, attack rates were actually higher for induced prey. However, induction increased handling times sufficiently that consumption rates of defended prey were lower than those of undefended prey. Modification of attack rate and handling time has important potential consequences for population dynamics; Type III functional responses can increase the stability of population dynamics and persistence because predation on small populations is low, allowing a relict population to survive. Simulations of a predator-prey population dynamic model revealed the stabilizing potential of the Type III response.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".